Resolving relative clause attachment ambiguity in Persian sentences

Shabani, Karim

doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2018.05.003

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Brysbaert and Mitchell (1996) state that the participants showed a preference for high (NP1) attachment in a complex NP modified by the RC in Dutch. Also, through an off-line comprehension task, Shabani (2018) finds out that NP1 (high) attachment has been observed in Persian when the NPs are bare, however this preference rate has decreased when there is a definite marker in the complex NP. The relative clauses follow the NP(s) they modify in the languages that are just mentioned.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 98%

Recency preference in ambiguous relative clause attachment in Turkish

Akal

2021

Dil Ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Turkish, Relative Clause (RC) attachment ambiguity arises when two noun phrases (NPs) in a genitive construction follow the (RC). The present paper studies Turkish RC attachment preferences of Turkish native speakers in two experiments through off-line comprehension tasks. While in the first experiment the main verb immediately follows the NP group, in the second experiment a group of adjuncts intervened between the second NP and the main verb. The aim of this setting was to observe the effect of Recency and Predicate Proximity in attachment preferences. The results of the first experiment showed a clear preference for low attachment (NP1). This preference was considered to be the result of Recency effect. The outcomes of the second experiment also showed a higher frequency for low attachment preference, but with an increasing rate for high attachment in comparison to the first experiment. This outcome showed first, the effect of Recency was still prevalent, and second, Predicate Proximity along with Relativized Relevance Principle may also have an increasing effect when there is an intervening group of adjuncts between the NP group and the main verb.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 98%

Recency preference in ambiguous relative clause attachment in Turkish

Akal

2021

Dil Ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Do danas su, međutim, kad je riječ o toj hipotezi, istraživanja najviše bila usmjerena na utvrđivanje preferencija za tipološki različite ili manje proučavane jezike, od perzijskoga do korejskoga (v. Baek, 2019;Jun i Bishop, 2015;Kotz i sur., 2019;Lee, 2018;Shabani, 2018). Nalazi u njima često nisu dovoljno dosljedni da bi se mogli sažeti u tablici poput Tablice 1., a interpretacije rezultata više se bave preferencijama za IG1 i IG2 nego širim teorijama.…”

Section: Princip Kasnoga Zatvaranjaunclassified

Kognitivna obrada sintaktički dvosmislenih konstrukcija

Vladisavljević

Bogetić

2021

Psihol. teme (Online)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

U psiholingvistici i kognitivnoj lingvistici mehanizmi obrade dvosmislenih jezičnih konstrukcija privlače pažnju jer njihovo razumijevanje može mnogo toga reći o fundamentalnim procesima razumijevanja jezika – povezivanju pojmova u jednu koherentnu reprezentaciju. U širokome spektru istraživanja o temi kognitivne obrade ovaj se rad fokusira na jednu vrstu dvosmislenosti za koju su različita istraživanja u različitim jezicima utvrdila kontradiktorne principe obrade: na sintaktičku dvosmislenost odnosne rečenice, do danas uvjerljivo najčešću i najkontroverzniju rečeničnu konstrukciju za istraživanje jezične obrade. Tekst nudi pregled empirijskih nalaza, hipoteza i implikacija za šire modele kognitivne obrade, uključujući njihove kontradiktornosti i metodološka pitanja koja zavređuju daljnje ispitivanje. Zaključna razmatranja sumiraju nalaze, nedostatke i nužne pravce za buduća istraživanja.

show abstract

A Review: RC Sentence Processing

AYDIN YILDIZ

2023

Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The question of whether and how native speakers and L2 learners process speech differently, as well as if transfer implications being available, may be answered by looking at ambiguity decision, one of the basic parsing procedures used in natural language processing. Studies have looked into how L1 and L2 speakers of different languages handle the RC ambiguity differently. In order to address the issues of transfer effects as well as the distinctions between L1 and L2 interpreting, differences between native speakers' and L2 learners' parsing selections, as well as some factors (working memory, animacy, discourse, syntax or semantic information, etc.) used during the experiments in ambiguity resolution, may add an entirely novel viewpoint. Although most of the studies tried to bring a solution with one-stage or two-stage models, the argument of this study is that there are definitely differences between the L1 and L2 processing and ambiguity resolving, and also, universality is impossible. Therefore, there needs to be much more evidences with the same instruments, tasks, and same sources of information conducted to vast amount of participant groups (from different ages, or different backgrounds) in order to reach a certain conclusion to state the reason behind this difference.

show abstract

Resolving relative clause attachment ambiguity in Persian sentences

Cited by 3 publications

References 21 publications

Recency preference in ambiguous relative clause attachment in Turkish

Recency preference in ambiguous relative clause attachment in Turkish

Kognitivna obrada sintaktički dvosmislenih konstrukcija

A Review: RC Sentence Processing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About